In Supreme Court, lawyer alleges sexual assault, illegal detention by police in Noida

Appearing for the petitioner, senior advocate Vikas Singh said, “This is a very gross case happening right around Delhi. If it is happening in Noida, just imagine the plight of the entire country.”

The bench, however, asked why the lawyer had not approached the Allahabad High Court instead as the matter pertains to UP. “We are conscious you live in Noida and the SC is more convenient. But that’s the only ground for filing under Article 32?” the court asked.

Article 32 of the Constitution grants every individual the right to move the SC for the enforcement of their fundamental rights.

Justice Nath remarked, “If we start entertaining all this, then all over Delhi… will start to come to the Supreme Court only.”

Singh agreed the case may be transferred to the HC. “Let your lordships transfer it then. In the meantime, direct them to keep the CCTV. Otherwise all the evidence will be destroyed.”

Singh then sought to remind that the bench was considering a suo motu matter in relation to absence of functioning CCTV cameras in police stations in Rajasthan. “…This may be made a test case. This should be a message for the entire country. This kind of treatment to a lawyer!,” he said.

Agreeing to take up the plea, the bench said, “Normally, we would not have entertained this case. However, considering the serious allegations made in the petition and the fact that the issue also relates to locking of CCTV cameras and as this bench is monitoring the installation and functioning of CCTV cameras taking up an incident from Rajasthan, we are entertaining this petition.”

As Singh sought protection for the petitioner, the court said, “they will dare not touch her after” its order.

The plea said the lawyer was subjected to 14 hours of illegal detention, custodial sexual assault, torture, and coercion by uniformed police personnel at the police stattion, starting late on December 3.

It added that the petitioner was “targeted solely for discharging her professional duty and insisting on the mandatory registration of an FIR for her grievously injured client”, who was allegedly physically assaulted by employees of a news channel.
The plea said that the lawyer’s “life was immediately endangered when a government pistol was placed upon her neck by the police staff, coercing her to surrender her mobile phone passwords… she was also subjected to continuous threats of being killed in a fake encounter”.

“This coercion,” it added, “led to the immediate and deliberate deletion of all recorded video evidence from her and her client’s mobile devices”. The plea alleged that police officers “maliciously disabled and/or removed CCTV systems from the police station premises… thereby obstructing justice and destroying crucial evidence meant to curb custodial torture”.

The SC will hear the matter next on January 7, 2016
When contacted, a Noida Police officer refused to comment on the issue. “The matter is sub-judice. We do not want to comment now,” the officer said.